| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Mark Cave-Ayland" <m(dot)cave-ayland(at)webbased(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: bufmgr rewrite per recent discussions |
| Date: | 2005-02-16 17:27:50 |
| Message-ID: | 25402.1108574870@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
"Mark Cave-Ayland" <m(dot)cave-ayland(at)webbased(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> Reducing bgwriter_maxpages definitely seems to have helped with the larger
> values for shared_buffers. However, during the test I was still seeing large
> pauses that occurred at a rate that seemed inversely proportional to the
> number of shared buffers. So with shared buffers set to 1000, the pgbench
> test would 'pause' roughly every 5s for about 2-3s before continuing as
> quickly as before. With shared buffers set to 100000 there were only 2 or 3
> 2-3s pauses during the entire duration of the test. As a rule of thumb, it
> looked like the pauses occurred during update statements of the form "update
> a set b = b + 1". Is the bgwriter supposed to eliminate these type of pauses
> altogether?
What do you mean by "pause" exactly? pgbench doesn't emit any output
during a run so I'm not sure what you are watching.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Cave-Ayland | 2005-02-16 17:57:40 | Re: WIP: bufmgr rewrite per recent discussions |
| Previous Message | Mark Cave-Ayland | 2005-02-16 17:21:52 | Re: WIP: bufmgr rewrite per recent discussions |